A Flea for Architectural Design in Landscape 
THE CASCADA DE EA SELVA AT SAN ILDEFONSO 
Illustrating a proper degree of landscape formality in the surroundings of a Palace 
been possible for an architect to devote him¬ 
self to the study of the planting, excepting the 
certain plant materials which are peculiarly 
useful from the architectural point of view ; 
and in this regard, it seems to me, that the 
landscape man who plans and devotes him¬ 
self to the naturalistic in his work should 
work hand in hand with the architect, as the 
architect does with the sculptor and the 
painter in the decoration of a building. 
In order to make a house look as though it 
were built for a given site, that it could have 
been built nowhere else, and to make it seem 
as though it had alw'ays been there, the site 
and general character of the landscape should, 
as much as possible, suggest the design of 
the house. And when the architect has 
acquired all the suggestions possible from 
almost living on the site, then in turn his 
house should, when once designed, call for 
such treatment of the grounds as has been 
indicated by his study. Only in this way 
can an architectural landscape look natural 
and not forced. 1 ndeed a landscape of this 
sort is almost always a failure if not the nat¬ 
ural outcome of the conditions of the site. 
To illustrate : a terrace is, generally speaking, 
an ugly thing, unless it has been almost 
forced up on the designer by natural con¬ 
ditions. A straight path or road is often 
ugly, unless it is a natural circulation or be¬ 
cause it is the shortest 
distance between two 
important points. 
U nder these conditions 
it becomes desirable. 
In the landscape 
work of a city there is 
nothing so ugly as a 
small park, with irreg¬ 
ular and curved paths 
having no design, and 
bounded by four rec¬ 
tangular streets. All 
small parks amid citv 
blocks should be archi¬ 
tectural for the same 
reason that a building 
should have architec¬ 
tural surroundings. So 
long as the boundary 
lines of the park are 
visible from every part 
and are straight, the park should have a cer¬ 
tain amount of design or straight lines in its 
composition. 1 know of no place where this 
is better illustrated than in Paris. The Bois 
de Boulogne, which is so large a park that 
when one has passed a little distance into it 
he loses all thought of the boundary lines, 
should not have been made architectural and 
has properly been left quite natural. But it 
would have been a great loss to the city of 
Paris if a smaller park like the Luxembourg or 
the Tuileries Garden had been left naturalistic. 
H ow little New York has utilized its nat¬ 
ural advantages. It is difficult to think of 
anything more lamentable than the fact that 
such valuable sites as we have in New York 
in the way of small parks do so little to im¬ 
prove the appearance of the city. Except 
for the little breathing space they give (which 
one could get by going on any roof top) we 
might just as well do without them. Bryant 
Park, Madison Square and other small parks 
might, for a mere song, in comparison with 
the intrinsic value of the real estate, be made 
so beautiful that New Yorkers would find 
that they had had in their possession hidden 
treasures of which they knew little or nothing. 
But such a transformation, if carried out, 
could only effectively be done architecturally. 
While the ablest advice and highest recog¬ 
nized authorities are consulted should a 
234 
